Dong, 2015 ESD 30
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
IN RE: RON DONG, ) Protest Decision 2015 ESD 30
) Issued: August 30, 2015
Protestor. ) OES Case No. P-032-081115-FW
____________________________________)
Ron Dong, member of Local Union 174, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2015-2016 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”). The protest alleged that the Local Union 206 violated the Rules by sending campaigners to a UPS facility under Local Union 174’s jurisdiction.
Election Supervisor representative Deborah Schaaf investigated this protest.
Findings of Fact and Analysis
On August 8, 2015, three members of Local Union 206 campaigned on the parking lot where employees of UPS – Seattle hub park their cars. The campaigners sought accreditation signatures on Teamsters United petitions. The Seattle hub is under the jurisdiction of Local Union 174.
When they first arrived, the campaigners set up next to the guard station. UPS facility manager Dan White directed them away from that location, stating their presence there could block the flow of traffic into the parking lot and create a bottleneck. The manager did not remove them from the parking lot or otherwise interfere with their campaign activity. The campaigners complied with the directive.
A short time later, protestor Dong, a steward at the facility, approached the campaigners and saw they were not from Local 174 and were campaigning for candidates Dong opposed. At that point, he began telling members passing the campaigners not to sign the petitions. While doing so, a small group of members gathered around Dong and joined him in urging members not to sign. The group stood in the location that UPS manager White had directed the campaigners to vacate. The manager did not return to remove Dong and his group from that location.
The campaigners considered that UPS treated them differently and less favorably than Dong’s group by removing them from the location that opposing group subsequently occupied and taking no action against that group. To document the apparent disparate treatment, one of the campaigners used his cell phone to take a 7-second video of Dong’s group. The video depicts the group standing precisely in the location from which the campaigners had been removed, with one leaning on the stop sign adjacent to the guard station. One of the group depicted in the video saw the shot being taken. He is heard to say in a taunting tone, “You feel better now? You feel safe or something?” As he utters these words, he is seen taking a photo of the person shooting the video.
After consideration, the campaigners elected not to file a protest against UPS for treating Dong and his group more favorably. They told our investigator they did nothing with the 7-second video other than to allow OES to review it for purposes of the investigation of this protest.
Dong’s protest alleged that the campaigners violated the Rules by “doing surveillance on me and my coworkers since we don’t have the same views as them.” It further alleged that Local Union 206 violated the Rules by sending the campaigners to a facility under Local Union 174’s jurisdiction.
We reject the contention that the campaigners engaged in prohibited surveillance. It is well-established that taking photos and video is permitted to document activity to be used to support a protest. Teamsters United and Hoffa-Hall 2016, 2015 ESD 22 (August 13, 2015). The campaigners reasonably believed the treatment by UPS of Dong and his group was more favorable than that received by the campaigners. One campaigner took the video to obtain evidential support for a potential protest concerning this treatment. Under these circumstances, the taking of photos and video does not constitute prohibited surveillance. This is the case even where no protest of the activity was filed.
We also reject the protest’s allegation that Local Union 206 violated the Rules. Investigation showed that the campaigners were not sent by the local union. Instead, the campaigners exercised their rights as individual members to solicit support for candidates of their choosing. The parking lot access provision of Article VII, Section 12(e) permits members of one local union to campaign in the employee parking lot of a facility under the jurisdiction of another local union, where the object of the campaign activity is to seek support for a candidate for International office whose official jurisdiction, if elected (union-wide or regional), would include the location where the campaigning occurs. As the campaigners sought accreditation signatures for union-wide candidates, they had the right under the cited provision to campaign at the Seattle facility.
Accordingly, we DENY this protest.
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within two (2) working days of receipt of this decision. The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Supervisor in any such appeal. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing, shall specify the basis for the appeal, and shall be served upon:
Kathleen A. Roberts
Election Appeals Master
JAMS
620 Eighth Avenue, 34th floor
New York, NY 10018
kroberts@jamsadr.com
Copies of the request for hearing must be served upon the parties, as well as upon the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 1050 17th Street, N.W., Suite 375, Washington, D.C. 20036, all within the time prescribed above. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.
Richard W. Mark
Election Supervisor
cc: Kathleen A. Roberts
2015 ESD 30
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):
Bradley T. Raymond, General Counsel
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
braymond@teamster.org
David J. Hoffa
1701 K Street NW, Ste 350
Washington DC 20036
hoffadav@hotmail.com
Ken Paff
Teamsters for a Democratic Union
P.O. Box 10128
Detroit, MI 48210-0128
ken@tdu.org
Barbara Harvey
1394 E. Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, MI 48207
blmharvey@sbcglobal.net
Teamsters United
315 Flatbush Avenue, #501
Brooklyn, NY 11217
info@teamstersunited.org
Louie Nikolaidis
350 West 31st Street, Suite 40
New York, NY 10001
lnikolaidis@lcnlaw.com
Julian Gonzalez
350 West 31st Street, Suite 40
New York, NY 10001
jgonzalez@lcnlaw.com
David O’Brien Suetholz
515 Park Avenue
Louisville, KY 45202
dave@unionsidelawyers.com
Fred Zuckerman
P.O. Box 9493
Louisville, KY 40209
fredzuckerman@aol.com
Ron Dong
1423 S. Spokane Street
Seattle, WA 98144
sea1ddr@gmail.com
Teamsters Local Union 206
1860 NE 162nd Street
Portland, OR 97230
lynn_brown206@aol.com
Teamsters Local Union 174
14675 Interurban S303
Tukwila, WA 98168
cravenhill@teamsterslocal174.com
Deborah Schaaf
1521 Grizzly Gulch Drive
Helena, MT 59601
dschaaf@ibtvote.org
Jeffrey Ellison
214 S. Main Street, Suite 210
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
EllisonEsq@aol.com